BUSINESS COOPERATION 



containing terms offered by manufacturers throughout the 

 country. It was understood that these terms should be con- 

 sidered as confidential but it soon proved impossible to keep 

 the circulars from falling into the hands of outside parties. 

 As a result, many of the manufacturers withdrew their offers, 

 and the executive committee decided to make no further attempts 

 in this direction until some plan could be developed by which 

 the arrangements could be kept secret. The committee then 

 turned its attention to encouraging the state granges to invest 

 their funds in state agencies and manufacturing establishments 

 and to securing for the order the right to manufacture certain 

 makes of the more expensive agricultural implements. 1 



In addition to the work of the executive committee some 

 of the other officers of the National Grange at times allowed 

 their names to be used in endorsing certain commercial firms 

 as Grange agents and in one case with disastrous results. The 

 firm of Farley and Company of New York City was appointed 

 Grange agent by the state granges of North Carolina and Miss- 

 issippi and was recommended to Patrons all over the country 

 in a circular signed by Secretary Kelley of the National Grange. 

 Farley was master of Manhattan Grange, but the firm seems to 

 have been wholly fraudulent. Orders for supplies accompanied 

 by money and consignments of produce were received from 

 Patrons in many parts of the South and East without any returns 

 being made. As a result the confidence of many in the order 

 and especially in the officers of the National Grange was shaken. 

 The North Carolina State Grange reimbursed the Patrons in 

 that state for their losses, and claims were presented to the 

 National Grange at its eighth session in February, 1875. The 

 matter was thoroughly aired at this and the following sessions, 

 but the Grange finally decided that it was not responsible for 

 the endorsement of the firm. The charter of Manhattan Grange 

 was revoked, however, and resolutions were adopted directing 

 that in the future no officers other than the executive committee 

 should endorse agents and no firms should be recommended 



1 National Grange, Proceedings, vm. 23-26, 29-31 (February, 1875); Virginia 

 State Grange, Proceedings, i. 22 (April, 1874); Aiken, The Grange, 12. 



